Friends, most of you have been on an airplane. Here in America, the security makes you go through a ridiculous process. Take off your shoes, take off your belt. No liquids other than 100 milliliters, or whatever. Grandmas have to take off their shoes.
Because there was a guy who had a bomb in his contact lens, or his foot. Whatever. This is total nonsense.
I think the Israelis have it right--they look for those acting guilty. Much more efficient.
I've been through Israeli security a few times, on my way to Jerusalem. Here's how they do it--they look for those who look nervous, or guilty.

So, my point is this: If Trump is not guilty, why is he acting in such a manner? If he is not guilty, why did he fire the FBI director, who was looking into Russia ties?
And if Trump is not guilty, why is he always saying that the Mueller probe is: ("A Hoax", "Fake News", etc).
Because I think he is nervous, and acting exactly like a guilty person would. If he was not guilty, he'd just say, I welcome this, I will be proven right, let then go. But he does not say that, does he? You know why? Because he is guilty, that is why.

Guilty people are afraid of being caught, so they lie, and make everyone else who does not believe them to be bad.
Innocent people are not afraid, so they have no reason to do this, Right?

All of that is made-up nonsense, designed to fool the fools. There are no facts behind this obvious nonsense. Yet, some of those who live in a right-wing bubble of disinformation continue to believe it. I expect more intelligence and awareness from my Buddhist friends.

/.../ This is total nonsense.
I think the Israelis have it right--they look for those acting guilty. Much more efficient.
I've been through Israeli security a few times, on my way to Jerusalem. Here's how they do it--they look for those who look nervous, or guilty.

It can happen that a person who is not guilty acts guilty (or nervous to be possibly "found" guilty). Especially if they have been long time abused and mistreated as "guilty" for whatever reason and had to constantly act as if it were true. If they have learnt they have to constantly buckle and bow to the will and whims of some "master" above them in a position of power if they want to live in relative peace, who will treat them as "guilty" for something mostly at his/her whim.

So I'd rather say that your logic and reasoning as presented here is quite nonsensical.

Even in a public position of a certain authority, I can imagine this can easily be the case in a similar but different form. Being eager to please, in some way, or anxious to not be condemned, by the general public or major parts thereof, even a king might act as though "guilty" for some thing which is not true or not a true cause for moral guilt.

About the Trump stories, I have no idea and have not been able to follow them to know even what they are about (...and the clips could not provide the necessary context for me). I just wanted to say something against the very flawed general argument that "acting guilty" (in whichever way this judgment or perception comes about) => "being guilty" is a valid inference for the most part.

Actually I think in many circumstances (and depending on the person) the very opposite can be the case: The more "guilty" of something, the less some people act as if that were the case, not feeling the slightest pangs of conscience about something which has and does cause others harm, or even feeling troubled when accused, they can simply shrug it off and see no need to even defend themselves.

I think the Israelis have it right--they look for those acting guilty. Much more efficient.... If Trump is not guilty

I have heard & read Israeli firms controlled airport security on 9/11 and Israelis have been training some US security forces since 9/11. Some mainstream media articles, particularly Israeli media, below:

New York (CNN) -- Attorneys for the family of a 9/11 victim said they will push forward with a wrongful death lawsuit against United Airlines and a private security company despite a federal judge's decision to dismiss the Massachusetts Port Authority from the suit. The lawsuit, originally filed in Manhattan federal court, alleges that Massport, United Airlines and security company Huntleigh USA were responsible for the security breaches that led to the death of Mark Bavis, 31, who was aboard United Flight 175 when it crashed into the World Trade Center's South Tower on September 11, 2001.

With the United States on constant terror alert since the events of September 11, 2001, American police and law enforcement officials are taking advantage of Israel's expertise in various facets of counter-terrorism and first response to better protect the American people.

In 2002, Los Angeles Police Department detective Ralph Morten visited Israel to recieve training and advice on preparing security arrangements for large public gatherings. From lessons learned on his trip, Det. Morten prepared a new Homicide Bomber Prevention Protocol and was better able to secure the Academy Awards presentation.

In January 2003, thirty-three senior U.S. law enforcement officials - from Washington, Chicago, Kansas City, Boston and Philadelphia - traveled to Israel to attend a meeting on "Law Enforcement in the Era of Global Terror." The workshops helped build skills in identifying terrorist cells, enlisting public support for the fight against terrorism and coping with the aftermath of a terrorist attack.

The Dept of Homeland Security was, for a time, directed by Michael Chertoff, who is said to be a dual US-Israeli citizen, & who currently provides private security services: http://www.chertoffgroup.com/

Michael Chertoff (born November 28, 1953) is an American attorney who was the second United States Secretary of Homeland Security, serving under President George W. Bush. He was the co-author of the USA PATRIOT Act.

Michael Chertoff was born on November 28, 1953 in Elizabeth, New Jersey. His father was Rabbi Gershon Baruch Chertoff (1915–96), a Talmud scholar and the former leader of the Congregation B'nai Israel in Elizabeth. His mother is Livia Chertoff (née Eisen), an Israeli citizen and the first flight attendant for El Al. His paternal grandparents are Rabbi Paul Chertoff and Esther Barish Chertoff.

After last month's plot to send bombs from Yemen to the United States aboard a cargo plane, former U.S. Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff's whiskerless visage was ubiquitous on cable news. Solemnly warning that the nation needed stronger security procedures, Chertoff patiently repeated his talking points on ABC News's "World News Tonight", "Fox and Friends", CNBC's "Squawk Box" and Bloomberg TV.

Almost unmentioned in these appearances: Chertoff has a lot to gain financially if some of these measures are adopted. Between his private consulting firm, The Chertoff Group, and seats on the boards of giant defense and security firms, he sits at the heart of the giant security nexus created in the wake of 9/11, in effect creating a shadow homeland security agency. Chertoff launched his firm just days after President Barack Obama took office, eventually recruiting at least 11 top officials from the Department of Homeland Security, as well as former CIA director General Michael Hayden and other top military brass and security officials.

Again, as was posted, the Trump people phoned Russia at the request of Israel.

In short, based on what I have read & heard, the currently US security situation is strongly influenced by Israel. In other words, I doubt any solutions will be found in Israel. Israel, due to its history, despite what you posted, is obviously in a state of heightened security alertness.

The idea of being able to detect guilt from actions is subject to as many or more limitations and uncertainty than polygraph testing.

wikipedia on The polygraph test wrote:The polygraph test, uses questioning techniques along with technology that record physiological functions to ascertain truth and falsehood in response. It is commonly used by law enforcement in the United States, but rarely in other countries and has historically been an inexact science. ... The polygraph, ... which the U.S. National Academy of Sciences states, in populations untrained in countermeasures, can discriminate lying from truth telling at rates above chance, though below perfection.They added that the results apply only to specific events and not to screening, where it is assumed that the polygraph works less well.
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie_detection

The reasoning of the OP is more like a screening processing I'm thinking.

These tests do not detect lieing -- rather they detect a emotional response. The physiological reactions that supposedly "distinguish" liars may also occur in innocent individuals. For instance in persons who fear a false detection or feel passionately that they did not commit the crime. Therefore, although a physiological reaction may be occurring, the reasoning behind the response may be different.

wikipedia wrote:The cumulative research evidence suggests that machines do detect deception better than chance, but with significant error rates ...

Extraneous noise can come from embarrassment or anxiety and not be specific to lying. When subjects are aware of the assessment their resulting emotional response, especially anxiety, can impact the data. As well as with all testing,the examiner can cause biases within the test with their interaction with the subject and interpretation of the data.

I've emphasized the sections which can explain the OP's leaps of judgement.
It's import to note that the OP does not have evidence of a objective reaction. Rather the "tell" in this case is a personal judgement of the meaning (inferences) of a set of events. So two error prone inferences have to be combined in a chain of "reasoning". Psychology recognizes that attributions or inferences of another person's inner thoughts or motivations can be highly error prone and subject to personal and cognitive biases.

It's ironic what the type of reasoning applied by the OP might conclude about the emotional state, and thus impaired reasoning ability of, the OP's author. The methods used in the assessment expounded in the previous sentence should also be regarded as significantly error prone. As should the reasoning of the author of the OP -- despite the table pounding sense of black-and-white certainty.
------------------
Related Topics: Ladder of Inference, Fundamental Attribution Error, Attribution bias

Dr. Paul Ekman is best known for his IMO groundbreaking and detailed study of facial expressions and emotion. In 2014, Dr. Ekman ranked fifteenth among the most influential psychologists of the 21st century. Dr. Ekman has written more than 14 books and 170 published articles. https://www.paulekman.com/paul-ekman/
---------------
Over the last decade, Dr. Paul Ekman has had the opportunity to spend close to 50 hours in one-on-one conversations with the Dalai Lama. The content from their first dialogue was published in the book Emotional Awareness (2008). During their most recent meeting in New Delhi, India, (January 2012) they spent another 6 hours discussing compassion; this exchange was recorded and segmented into many different webisodes for our series called Developing Global Compassion, also the subject of a book.
Excerpts from Ekman's more recent conversations on compassion can be viewed at https://www.paulekman.com/webisodes/ (free)

All of that is made-up nonsense, designed to fool the fools. There are no facts behind this obvious nonsense. Yet, some of those who live in a right-wing bubble of disinformation continue to believe it. I expect more intelligence and awareness from my Buddhist friends.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.John Stuart Mill

The idea of being able to detect guilt from actions is subject to as many or more limitations and uncertainty than polygraph testing.

Best solution. Buddhism addresses causes rather than effects/symptoms.

USA stop the wars & imperialism, which it has spent $5 trillion fighting the enemies of Israel & Saudi Arabia rather than eradicating Al Qaeda. In fact, during the Libyan & Syrian wars, Al Qaeda &/or their affiliates (such as ISIS) were supplied & financed by the USA, NATO, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar & given medical care by Israel. Video: from the lips of the US Vice President.

All of that is made-up nonsense, designed to fool the fools. There are no facts behind this obvious nonsense. Yet, some of those who live in a right-wing bubble of disinformation continue to believe it. I expect more intelligence and awareness from my Buddhist friends.

Wouldn't be him fulfilling yet another campaign promise by draining the swamp?

Metta,
Paul.

Hillary lost, get over it, its almost as if you wish she had won so you would have a scandal to focus on, as to the topic of Trump's guilt, it appears you are off topic.

18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

Hillary lost, get over it, its almost as if you wish she had won so you would have a scandal to focus on, as to the topic of Trump's guilt, it appears you are off topic.

Hillary is but one player in decades worth of self-serving establishment corruption... her not being POTUS simply means this corruption can now be revealed, rather than indefinitely concealed. Trump can now finish what JFK started (although the problem became much more entrenched in the intervening years).

And no, my post was (and now is) very much on topic because it's an alternative explanation to Trump's actions and recent FBI events, which doesn't make recourse to Trump supposed guilt.

2. Registering AIPAC (The American Israel Public Affairs Committee) as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.

This morning the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on enforcement of the Foreign Agents Registration Act, and out of the blue South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham brought up AIPAC — the Israel lobby group the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. AIPAC comes to Capitol Hill “in droves” and has a lot of contacts in Israel so maybe it should be considered a “foreign agent?” Graham asked.

it proves what I already knew--JfK was an excellent speaker. I even like his high class Boston accent.
But, nothing there proves the point you wanted to make, which is....?
Not sure what point you wanted it to prove, or why this proves it.
What point did you want to prove?